imperspective wrote:Whatup Whatup. Checking in. Retaker, got a 162 last October after a few months of ineffective studying. (PTing with no blind review or drilling.) Discovered TLS about a month later.

Just a few quick questions for now. I'm just starting now with the LGB. But I'm not really sure what to do after that. I'm thinking about going for 7sage and the Cambridge books. But, if the Cambridge books use PT questions, won't that reduce the amount of PT's I can take? I've also heard good things about the LSAT trainer, but there are so many options and I don't want to be counterproductive.

Thanks

Hey, welcome!

You'll definitely be better off once you get really grounded in the basics. Cambridge packets only use PTs up to 40, which emphasizes what you'll hear a lot of here: drill with questions from earlier tests and save the newer tests (30 or so) for practice once you have everything else down.

I recommend Manhattan (definitely for LR, not to LG yet). The PowerScore books just seem to be ponderously written and are tedious in general. Manhattan has a light, approachable, almost entertaining sense to it, and I can tell you that when I started using Manhattan, my comprehension went way up.

The LSAT trainer was written by Mike Kim, founder of Manhattan, and I'm intending to purchase it once I finish Manhattan LR in about two weeks. There's no reason that you can't use various companies' curriculum; just absorb the information and use the strategies that feel most natural to you.

imperspective wrote:Thanks to the both of you! I already went and bought the books and they should be arriving tomorrow. I have PDFs of almost all the PTs too, so I think I'll be alright. (If I want to redrill a section I can print it off.) I just started going through the LGB and I'm already doing a little bit better because of (I think) changes in my lifestyle from last time (which was when I worked nights and had an irregular sleep pattern).

What I don't know, and what I think this group will be able to help me with is what to do next. Do any of you pay for 7sage or do you just use its free videos? I'll probably buy the lsat trainer first--then wait for the new editions of Manhattan to come out. All the while, I should be drilling with cambridge. When my books do arrive, is there a systematic process that I should follow? Like, should I just do the "easy" ones from each type until I notice a problem, focus on that problem, and move on?

Thanks again to the both of you (Twitch & mornin). I'll try to give back somehow!

I use 7Sage videos, they are fantastic, as is the LSAT test analyzer on the 7sage site (free, I forget what it's called, but you can put your answer choices in it, it scores the test for you, divvies up all the questions by type, and has a spot for you to put a new answer after blind review. Totally awesome, especially the way it tracks trends and lets you import your info into Excel.)

I see no reason to wait for the new editions of Manhattan to come out (but you can ask in the Manhattan thread if they will be substantially different; the books as they are now and fantastic). Personally, I'm using LSAT Trainer as the bridge between LR and LG. SO I'm currently doing Manhattan LR, then I will do the Trainer, to review LR and introduce me to LG, then go to Manhattan LG. Drilling throughout, obviously.

I'm just going through the books chapter by chapter and drilling questions on the subjects as I go. Make sure you focus on getting in a good review after the questions, because that's where you really cement your understanding. Sounds like you're on the right track!

Checking in, retaking an October 164 after I got WL'd at four T14s. Hoping to squeeze a few more points out of the test this time around. Studying last time was ineffective/ wandering, so scheduling/planning a lot more this time.

Starting by picking up Manhattan LR over the next few weeks, then I'll get into the LSAT Trainer. Also discovered 7sage way too late in the game last time around, so looking forward to using that for LG.

mornincounselor wrote:I have altered the trajectory of my training and with it my goals for the month. I have been studying like Wilbur 2.0, today I will begin training through multiplication. (Thanks Mike Kim*)

My goals for the month of March are to slowly, patiently, and not while in a busy office, to complete all the drills as proscribed in the LSAT Trainer. Along the way I will focus on developing skills and identifying a solid foundation of habits for this test. I will limit myself to 1 lesson in the trainer in a sitting and a maximum of 2 lessons each day.

I will keep an ongoing journal chronicling my journey.

I will begin reading natural science type periodicals which may closely resemble passages of that type on the LSAT.

Welcome to all the new people.

---

*: See: (LSAT Trainer, The -- Kim, Mike -- Lesson 1)

I see you've internalized some of the intro chapter's suggested methodology. I'm currently reading through the Trainer myself -- Are you following one of Mike Kim's study plans? I'm trying to stick to the 2-month plan to leave plenty of time for drilling, but we'll see how that turns out

Lsataddict175 wrote:Where is everyone up to in their studies? I'll be finished the Trainer in a week or so, then I'll move on to Manhattan LR and Blueprint LG + drilling. Also, around how many hours are you putting in each day?

Doing about 3-4 hours a day, 5 days or so a week. Working on the Trainer. About 80% through. Not sure what's next. LG Bible?

For the people who are reading through/finishing up the trainer, do you feel like it's going to be adequate to jump into drilling afterwards? Or, are you guys/gals going to read through other prep materials before drilling? Just wondering if I should get the Manhattan RC/LR books as well.

jdom wrote:For the people who are reading through/finishing up the trainer, do you feel like it's going to be adequate to jump into drilling afterwards? Or, are you guys/gals going to read through other prep materials before drilling? Just wondering if I should get the Manhattan RC/LR books as well.

I've taken a Manhattan LSAT class and read through their guides, so I likely won't be able to provide an accurate assessment as to whether the Trainer is good enough as a "stand-alone" book, but assuming you have done at least a bit of prep, I can honestly say the Trainer is tying things together extremely nicely for me -- although it definitely helps that there are a lot of parallels b/n Manhattan & the Trainer

Planning on finishing the 8-week program March-April, drilling from Cambridge May-July, and cranking out full-PT's August-Sept, while ramping up on timing throughout.

Does anyone have any pointers on how to improve LG? It is still my weakest section and despite people claiming it as the easiest section to rack up points once you 'nail' it, I still feel terribly inept at the whole thing. Any advice would be appreciated.

mrhaart wrote:Does anyone have any pointers on how to improve LG? It is still my weakest section and despite people claiming it as the easiest section to rack up points once you 'nail' it, I still feel terribly inept at the whole thing. Any advice would be appreciated.

Drill. Drill, drill, drill. I'm the same as you, in that LG has always given me difficulty (not so much with accuracy as timing). I saw the most improvement when I drilled from the Cambridge LG bundles. I'd do at least 8 -10 games a day, review them, and--if I was completely stumped by the setup--would watch 7sage's videos to determine the correct approach.

I can't emphasize drilling enough. When I first started, I was frustrated by the fact that everyone on TLS was suggesting that LG was the easiest section to guarantee points; it just wasn't working for me. However, I did see incredible gains after extensive drilling. It might take a few weeks to really click--or even months--but I promise that you will see noticeable improvement if you work at it. I may not be perfect, but I am so much better than I was when I started my prep.

mrhaart wrote:I've taken a Manhattan LSAT class and read through their guides, so I likely won't be able to provide an accurate assessment as to whether the Trainer is good enough as a "stand-alone" book, but assuming you have done at least a bit of prep, I can honestly say the Trainer is tying things together extremely nicely for me -- although it definitely helps that there are a lot of parallels b/n Manhattan & the Trainer

Planning on finishing the 8-week program March-April, drilling from Cambridge May-July, and cranking out full-PT's August-Sept, while ramping up on timing throughout.

Checking in for the second retake after a mediocre December administration. I definitely did not take enough preptests. For now, it's getting back my motivation, drilling my ass off, timed sections, and working full-time. The good thing about applying next cycle is that I will have post-grad work experience, another LOR, and presumably, a significantly higher score.

Did my 6th PT on Friday. It was horrible. My mind was completely elsewhere for the first two sections; I felt myself momentarily hyperfocusing on every tiny little noise and distraction in a way that sucked brainpower from the test every few seconds.

I was so lost on LG (which I haven't studied yet, but can almost always brute force my way through most of before time is called with a reasonable rate of correct answers). I only finished two games and only got 8 of 23 correct. The next section was LR and I was second guessing myself on half the questions. Finally, RC came around and I was relieved because it is easily my strongest section (avg -0/-1). By RC I had settled into the test and I breezed through the last LR section with only 4 questions I felt iffy on.

Final count:LG: -15 (HOLY MOTHER)LR1: -3RC: -1LR2: -1

Total score 165. After review I pulled that up to a 174, but those games are clearly costing me the 170s. I am not switching to studying games until I finish Manhattan LR book at the end of the month, and I know I will be better off for having really ingrained LR before switching my focus, but man... that LG score really cuts deep.

Twitch wrote:Did my 6th PT on Friday. It was horrible. My mind was completely elsewhere for the first two sections; I felt myself momentarily hyperfocusing on every tiny little noise and distraction in a way that sucked brainpower from the test every few seconds.

I was so lost on LG (which I haven't studied yet, but can almost always brute force my way through most of before time is called with a reasonable rate of correct answers). I only finished two games and only got 8 of 23 correct. The next section was LR and I was second guessing myself on half the questions. Finally, RC came around and I was relieved because it is easily my strongest section (avg -0/-1). By RC I had settled into the test and I breezed through the last LR section with only 4 questions I felt iffy on.

Final count:LG: -15 (HOLY MOTHER)LR1: -3RC: -1LR2: -1

Total score 165. After review I pulled that up to a 174, but those games are clearly costing me the 170s. I am not switching to studying games until I finish Manhattan LR book at the end of the month, and I know I will be better off for having really ingrained LR before switching my focus, but man... that LG score really cuts deep.

Nothing to worry about. Super learnable, which you know. Just thought maybe some reassurance was in order.

Twitch wrote:Did my 6th PT on Friday. It was horrible. My mind was completely elsewhere for the first two sections; I felt myself momentarily hyperfocusing on every tiny little noise and distraction in a way that sucked brainpower from the test every few seconds.

I was so lost on LG (which I haven't studied yet, but can almost always brute force my way through most of before time is called with a reasonable rate of correct answers). I only finished two games and only got 8 of 23 correct. The next section was LR and I was second guessing myself on half the questions. Finally, RC came around and I was relieved because it is easily my strongest section (avg -0/-1). By RC I had settled into the test and I breezed through the last LR section with only 4 questions I felt iffy on.

Final count:LG: -15 (HOLY MOTHER)LR1: -3RC: -1LR2: -1

Total score 165. After review I pulled that up to a 174, but those games are clearly costing me the 170s. I am not switching to studying games until I finish Manhattan LR book at the end of the month, and I know I will be better off for having really ingrained LR before switching my focus, but man... that LG score really cuts deep.

The fact that you bombed LG but managed to do as well as you ended up doing on the rest of the sections is still indicative of a strong test performance imho -- One of those "worst case scenarios" that left you with a still-solid score. Judging by your previous posts, you seem to be a natural at LR + RC -- Have any general tips, especially for RC?